via Daily Kos:The Geneva Conventions - One Soldiers Perspective

[Coexist]

The best I've seen yet on this.

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/9/18/171940/158

by SGT MAJOR MYERS
Mon Sep 18, 2006 at 02:19:40 PM PDT
"Art. 3. In the case of armed conflict not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties, each Party to the conflict shall be bound to apply, as a minimum, the following provisions:

SGT MAJOR MYERS's diary :: ::
(1) Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria. To this end the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons: (a) violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture; (b) taking of hostages; (c) outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment; (d) the passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples. (2) The wounded and sick shall be collected and cared for. An impartial humanitarian body, such as the International Committee of the Red Cross, may offer its services to the Parties to the conflict."

This article does not and has never held any ambiguity for me and I do not believe it has ever held any for the millions of American soldiers (to include the OSS and CIA operatives) who have served in our armed forces since the United States signed these conventions. I make this statement without reservation and with the backdrop of having served in the United States Army for nearly three decades including several combat tours of duty. I also say to you that I proudly carried the "Geneva Conventions Card" in my pocket every single day of my military career from the day it was issued to me in basic training. I carried that card proudly because it represented the moral stature of my nation. It said to me that no matter what, no matter how I was treated, if I was captured or if I captured an enemy soldier I knew what my country expected of me and what my country stood for and I would never violate that trust. I would never violate the trusts placed in me by the citizens of our great nation, my comrades in arms and yes, even my enemy.

I thought not to write this post. I thought not to write it because I have become convinced that Americans, at least that vast multitude that continue to allow themselves to be deluded by the Bush administration, don't care about anything but themselves much less the Geneva Conventions and I would therefore be posting to the wind. I still believe that and unfortunately I believe it with all my heart but in spite of that stolid belief I had an overpowering need to express my utter disdain and contempt for George W. Bush and the actions of his administration. So I say to you that in my opinion, this administration possesses not one iota of common decency, honor, or moral character and these attempts on their part to change the United States interpretation of the Geneva Conventions are just one more example of an administration with no moral compass. This is to me just one more example of a Commander in Chief who has removed his cloak of moral authority and I say God help us all if our elected officials in the House of Representatives and Senate allow this grotesque interpretation of the conventions to become the law of the land because that will be just one more nail in the coffin of our democracy.

Those Are The Sergeant Majors Thoughts On That.

[ShortnFiery]

1. I would be willing to contend that the vast majority of Americans

who think that TORTURE works and should be used at every given opportunity, have not served in the military.

Many civilians have a warped impression regarding what interrogation truly is:

Here's what the US Army Field Manual 34-52, Entitled "Interrogations",


http://www.globalsecurity.org/intell/library/policy/army/fm/fm34-52/


Chapter 3, Paragraph 2 provides for our perusal:

Interrogation Process
The interrogation process involves the screening and selection of sources for interrogation and the use of interrogation techniques and procedures. Both screening and interrogation involve complex interpersonal skills, and many aspects of their performance are extremely subjective. Each screening and interrogation is unique because of the interaction of the interrogator with the source. There are five interrogation phases: planning and preparation, approach, questioning, termination, and reporting.
--------

Those of us who have served in the Military KNOW the Geneva Conventions. Those of us who have served in certain branches of Army Intelligence know this field manual intimately - it's an unclassified "Bible" as guidance to those who don't hold a clearance yet wish to LEGALLY (in accord with Article 3 of The Geneva Conventions) glean valuable combat intelligence in the least amount of time.

Please view the link cited above and review The Table of Contents within Army Field Manual 34-52. NOW, THERE'S YOUR CLARIFICATION, MR. BUSH!

Without getting bogged down in too many details, this Manual *FULLY* address how to Process, Evacuate, and Interrogate (Question) Prisoners.

Those of us who have observed these techniques in use can say that those who apply them well, also have an inherent talent for gleaning knowledge from people.

IMO, the reason Bush-World does not appreciate NON-Coercive questioning of prisoners is that many of them are "so afraid" to be considered gifted is truly a Mental Health Problems. The Executive Branch views this (and all others) FEMININE quality of active listening and intelligent verbal interrogation maneuvers as "below them" and a "sign of weakness" to show kindness, i.e., feminine meter off the scale.

They can't face the truth about effective questioning of Prisoners. Hell, The Avon Lady would be much more effective in "gleaning informations" than these non-military a**-holes who want to beat prisoners. :grr:

Once you profoundly HARM a prisoner, either mentally or physically, that positive acquaintance that could have been developed between interrogator and prisoner has NO chance of coming to fruition. Once you inspire a person's hatred by personal insult or humiliation, you WILL THEN have to beat any information out of them - and we all know that information is very un-reliable.

A gifted interrogator can sit down with you or I - and - before you know it, even the most self-satiated of us would be pouring out "our lives' story." If you sit down with a person, even if I considered you someone I initially don't care for, through talented questioning, active listening and other positive verbal exchanges, you are going to glean a treasure trove on information. Even if a prisoner is UNWILLING to betray his leaders, the right techniques in questioning will eek out information that will be highly useful when corroborated with other interrogation data. Further, it doesn't take long to develop a friendly aquaintence and you don't have to spoil but show genuine concern for the prisoner's welfare and you will GLEAN MORE valuable information.

Bottom Line: "The ART of Effective Interrogations" is considered too prissy for the SOCIOPATHS within the Neo-Conservative Executive Branch. :thumbsdown:

[Coexist]

2. Great post.

I can't think of anything to add but this :thumbsup:

[ShortnFiery]

3. Thanks

BTW cute avatar kitty cartoon. ;)

ON EDIT: And The Sergeant Major's ON POINT and well expressed.

Our Sergeant Majors run the Army and they know the troops better than any other rank of leader. When I resigned my Commission so that my Marine husband and I would not be separated, Our Battalion Command Sergeant Major surprisingly called me into his office, "I'm usually thrilled when young lieutenants resign, but you are one of the very few that I feel bad about leaving the service."

A complement like that means more than any old accolade a General Officer would quip insincerely after the award of a medal.

Yes, Sergeant Majors (and 1st Sergeants) truly run the Army. :-)

[nealmhughes]

5. Just as Chief Petty Officers run the Navy and CG.

They run their divisions, not the jo's who are nominally in charge. Most learn early and fast to "go to your stateroom, concentrate on your qualifications as OOD and let me run things. there will be things for you to sign, but back me up 100% of the time when I chew butt and you can be the "hero" by mitigating my proposals slightly to make the boys make you seem their hero over the crusty old chief."

By the time jo's are Lt.Cdrs they learn the ways of the world...

Once they are useful, they become politicians with their flag officer, though...

The E-1s and 2 are too green to do much more than scutt work. The E-3s and E-4s train them, the E-5s and 6s supervise them and the E-7s-9s run the divisions and departments. So, in a real sense, the entire moral tone of the command is centered midground in the enlisted ranks. It is up to the higher enlisted ranks to enforce the moral and technical training to their men, and once they have done their jobs, hopefully it has stuck.

[G_j]

4. ambiguity

(great article btw)

the whole "ambiguity" argument is dishonest
there was no "ambiguity" before the war criminals started questioning it

[Coexist]

6. .